Njuguna Kahari & Kiai Advocates v Gacanga (Environment and Land Miscellaneous Application E040 of 2023) [2024] KEELC 3868 (KLR) (16 May 2024) (Ruling)
- Court
- Environment & Land Court
- Case number
- 3868
- Citation
- [2024] KEELC 3868 (KLR)
- Decided
- 16 May 2024
The court ruled that the issue of whether there was a retainer between the Plaintiff and the Defendant must be determined first before the Taxing Officer can tax the bill.
Facts
The Plaintiff, Njuguna Kahari & Kiai Advocates, filed a Bill of Costs against the Defendant, Wilson Gacanga, claiming Kshs 4,717,615.60 (inclusive of VAT) for representation in a civil suit. The Defendant raised a Preliminary Objection alleging the lack of a retainer between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.
Issues
- Whether there was a retainer between the Plaintiff and the Defendant
- Jurisdiction of the Taxing Officer to consider the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs
Reasoning
The court held that the existence of a retainer is a prerequisite for the Taxing Officer to consider the Advocate/Client Bill of Costs. The court emphasized that the issue must be determined before the Taxing Officer embarks on taxing the bill.
Outcome
The court ruled that the issue of the retainer must be determined first.
Orders
- The court ruled that the issue of the retainer must be determined first before the Taxing Officer can tax the bill.
Authorities cited
Cases cited (7)
- Wilfred N. Konosi T/A Konosi & Co. Advocates v Flamco Ltd
- Owners of Motor Vessel ‘Lilian S’ v Caltex Oil (Kenya) Ltd
- Mukisa Biscuits Manufacturing Co. Ltd v Westend Distributors Ltd
- Njeru Nyaga & Co. Advocates v George Ngure Kariuki
- Omulele & Tollo Advocates v Magnum Properties Ltd
- Mereka & Co. Advocates v Zakhem Construction (Kenya)
- Ochieng Onyango, Kibet & Ohaga Advocates v Akiba Bank Ltd
Loading judgment…